Tuesday, October 21, 2014

I'm not really that involved with the online sex wars so much these days. Partially because I just don't have the time, but also because I got bored with the forums etc. However, I'm still interested in the ideas themselves, or, rather, I can't help but get angry when I hear or see some new BS. Once you are attuned to it, you can't ignore it.

A few little blips have popped-up on my radar in recent months.

There seems to be greater hysteria than ever about rape. We seem to be hearing about it more and more, and there is ever greater drama and social-media screaming whenever anyone suggests that one type of rape (e.g. violent) might just be worse than other (e.g. a woman has already had sex with a man before, and goes to bed with him, but then changes her mind but doesn't really say anything). To anyone with any common sense left (an ever diminishing breed) this might seem perplexing. After all, surely most crimes are made worse by the presence of violence? For example, would you not see any difference between a burglary and a burglary that also involved a violent attack? To say that the burglary with a violent attack was worse is not to deny that the one without wasn't still a violation. So why can't feminists admit that there are degrees of severity with rape? Well I think the reason is because they have spent so much effort over the years in pushing less severe and more dubious instances of sex where the consent is ambiguous or regretted AFTERWARDS that they are scared that their whole project could come falling down if sufficiently challenged. Hence the hysteria.

Also, its worth repeating that time and time again when it comes to the issue of various forms of 'attack' (e.g. threats) against women, the women themselves have often been unmasked as faking the attacks to gain attention etc. Also these feminists desperately WANT attacks on themselves. It fuels them and validates their whole philosophy. They crave being victims.

And that brings me on to another thing thats come to my attention: the emergence of the 'Social Justice Warrior'. This annoying breed essentially haunts the web looking to 'spread awareness' of some form or other of politically correct cause. Notice that they don't typically DO anything to help people. The environmental ones aren't out cleaning up rubbish, inventing more efficient solar panels, or de-toxifying lakes. They are just on the web telling everyone else how bad they are to the environment. Same for the ones who spread 'awareness' of rape etc. Now of course there is a place for waking people up, or pointing out arguments that they hadn't thought about, but these Social Justice Warriors seem usually to have little in the way of reasoned argument that they wish to communicate, and they just want to repeat the same mantras over and over. I think its more about them gaining attention for themselves. It seems like a very teenagery thing to me.

Lastly, something called Gamergate has come to my attention. I don't know all the tiny details of it, but I read up a bit about it. Theres also a brief summary here:

My take on it: the media are obsessed with making everything that involves women into a 'nasty evil men Vs poor innocent damsel in distress' story. In particular, they love using this tactic when they need to deflect attention (as in this case where they have been exposed for corruption). Similarly, there was recently an online scam whereby some company pretended to be hackers who were going to release naked photos of Emma Watson soon after she had given a feminist speech at the UN. The usual feminist newspaper commentators of course had a field day with this and didn't appear to do even the most basic journalistic fact-checking but instead rushed-in to claim this as an example of every form of female victimisation imaginable. Interestingly, even when the story was exposed as a scam (something which the journalists themselves should have done) some of the papers, like The Telegraph, STILL keep their stories up, and The Guardian acknowledged that it was a scam but still kept up the line that it was evidence of how feminists are intimidated (without even considering that Watson may never have taken naked photos, and hence would have known the whole thing was a scam). Just think about what this says about journalists from the 'big' papers these days.

Heres something for the feminists and 'patriarchy' conspiracy theorists to ignore:Carnage pub crawl who attacked a homeless manOf course, if a group of men had done this to a woman, it would be called a serious violent sexual assault.One comment on the Mail's page had me laughing, and I thought was particularly true:Imagine if a group of drunk men had attacked and torn the clothes off a woman in the streets...It would be headline BBC news for a month and the subject of endless "analysis" and investigations into "misogyny" on BBC Radio 4. The victim would write a book and it'd be Book of the Week (repeated regularly every 6 months). There would also be an "in-depth" documentary and a Classic Serial in six parts about it all. Then, for years afterwards, she'd be asked for her opinion on the price of plums, whether string is as good as it used to be, whether cats are better than elephants and other endless drivel. Perhaps it's just as well we've been spared, eh?

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

Something called the 'Everyday Sexism Project' has become popular online and been turned into a book. Its a place for women to report examples of sexist comments said to them or sexist actions taken against them. There have been thousands of submissions, and feminists are pointing to it as evidence that women face a daily barrage of sexist abuse.

Yet how do we know how many of these claims are even true? Or how many are exaggerated?

We don't.

A site like this is just a lightning rod for angry feminists. And as we've seen time and time again, they will stretch the truth, lie or do whatever it takes to further their cause. So who is to say that feminist activists aren't flooding onto that site and posting fictional claims?

The project really doesn't feel true to me. In particular, I strongly doubt that (at least here in London and the South East) women are constantly having men shout at them on the street. I NEVER hear this. If it were happening constantly I'm sure I would witness it.

Sunday, March 30, 2014

The original headline for THIS article about a drunk Japanese man having his leg severed by a train was 'That'll teach him not to get legless'. The comments from readers quickly pointed out how disgusting this cheap joke was and the headline is now changed. People power in action.

Monday, February 10, 2014

Yet another idiotic, amateur-sociologist-cum-journalist writing about gender issues, taking a nasty anti-male stance. I've become pretty inured to the stupidity and hate of this genre, but when the targets are children or teenagers it does tend to get my hackles up.

I suppose its ironic in an article in which a woman is crowing about female educational achievement that she makes the kind of schoolgirl error in logic that would probably make her the class dunce. I'm talking, of course, of her failure to understand the fact that any 'trend' that is occurring now will take time to filter up the food chain of careers. Just because 17 year old girls are now more ambitious, why should that change the earning differential between men and women in their 40s, 50s or 60s?

Anyway, Mzzz Fairly (she certainly doesn't write fairly) certainly doesn't look like a spring chicken, so she might want to re-consider her celebration of the collapse of motivation amongst young men (again, accepting for the time being that this is real). She may be able to afford to take a snooty attitude towards carpenters but when she's truly old and in need of a pension, good health care, perhaps some nursing care, and certainly preferring a stable society around her, she might want to re-think her stance on the collapse of male motivation. After all, who still provides the lion's share of tax? Do you really want a ghetto Britain with vast swathes of young men out of work, with no motivation, not paying their taxes (and, indeed, leeching off the welfare state) and spending their days drinking and playing pool? Does she really celebrate all the consequences of this, not least of which may be increased mental health issues and yet higher suicide rates amongst young men?

Turn of the tide: feminists begin to regret

Cosmopolitan (The women's magazine that urges women to use men for sex) Editor Lorraine Candy has a change of mind and now urges women not to have "Soul-less sex":

"We didn't feel ashamed about one-night stands...this, we thought, is what feminism is about."

70s feminist Fay Weldon now says:

"It is the fault of me and my like, who... got it wrong.

So were we wrong, we feminists, setting women free? The results have been devastating – greater than we ever imagined.

We steamed ahead, changing the world with too little caution, and I hope the future will forgive us.

The pendulum has swung too far over. But it may yet swing back again. Societies, thank God, tend to be self-righting."

"Once a man could look forward to starting a family and the dignity that came from being the provider. Forget it. At best as a man you're decorative, look after the kids and earn a bit sometimes; at worst you're a write-off. Women are elbowing the men out. The boys get anxious, the girls swagger. The male suicide rate goes up, female down. Twenty-eight per cent of us now live in single person households - a lonely and unnatural state - and most of the 28 per cent consist of young men. It is strange that it is left to a woman to suggest, in the normal nurturing way, that men start some kind of movement to promote their gender's status and self-esteem - call it masculinism, brotherism, machoism, what you want - and some mark of the success of the feminist movement, that it needs to be done."

60's feminist Doris Lessing now says:"It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests.

Men seem to be so cowed that they can't fight back, and it is time they did."

An excerpt from an interview with Joan Rivers:

"She's not with the feminists when it comes to matters of the heart. For her, they're to blame for the current parlous state of our relationships, as depicted in these television Shows (Such as Sex in the city) and films. "I saw this coming. You cannot be equal to a man, you cannot make a man feel 'I don't need you' or 'I'll take my sex when I want it'. All these shows are so sad."

Camille Paglia :

"Women have been discouraged from genres such as sculpture that require studio training or expensive materials.

But in philosophy, mathematics, and poetry, the only materials are pen and paper.

Male conspiracy cannot explain ALL female failures.

I am convinced that, even without restrictions, there still would have been no female Pascal, Milton, or Kant.

. . . Even now, with all vocations open, I marvel at the rarity of the woman driven by artistic or intellectual obsession, that self-mutilating derangement of social relationship which, in its alternate forms of crime and ideation, is the disgrace and glory of the human species."

PubMed, which indexes the 3,000 leading medical journals, from the 1950s to present, contains 42 articles on women’s health for every one on men’s health.